.
Posted on 12/14/2010 9:25:59 AM PST by Smokeyblue
An Army doctor who disobeyed orders to deploy to Afghanistan because he questions Barack Obama's eligibility to be president has pleaded guilty to 1 of 2 charges against him.
At a court-martial proceeding Tuesday in Maryland, Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin of Greeley, Colo., pleaded guilty to not meeting with a superior when ordered to do so and not showing up at Fort Campbell in Kentucky where he was supposed to report.
(Excerpt) Read more at wkrn.com ...
But why let them win like that? Why not make the government prove its case? At the very least, we’d be allowed to see what information the government haves that proves that it is in the right. I still think my original claim stands, this guy has no case, and he is just hoping for leniency in sentencing.
That won’t go anywhere either. No civilian court has ever accepted any sort of challenge to 0bama’s eligibility. It is highly unlikely they would for this situation either.
We’ve only carried out one execution for desertion since the Civil War (Eddie Slovak during WWII). That said, I do think this fellow should spend at least the next 10 years in Leavenworth.
The retired military brass are afraid that if the issue of whether Obama can “act as President” is pushed when the military leadership this corrupt, there will be a bad precedent set.
And already, the military judge has said that the Constitutional status of the President is irrelevant to combat orders. That’s a scary precedent right there. If you take that precedent to its logical conclusion, Lakin’s brigade commanders could also have ordered him to deploy for combat operations in Iran, and it would be “irrelevant” whether a valid Commander-in-Chief had ever authorized combat in Iran.
See, the whole case that the military is making is that it doesn’t MATTER whether there is a valid President who authorized combat operations in Afghanistan, because brigade commanders can give all these smaller orders that, when combined, accomplish military combat without there having to be authorization from “the President” (who is given the sole authority to “use force” in the war on terrorism).
And that is a serious, serious claim that should have the military folks saying WTH???!!
He pleaded not guilty to a second charge of missing a flight he was required to be on. His court-martial at Fort Meade is continuing on that count.
“When a defendant pleads guilty, whether in a civilian court or a military court martial, they give up their right to appeal.”
__
Not only that, but he must sit down with the judge and convince her that he understands what it means to plead guilty — in this case, it means acknowledging that he knows the orders he disobeyed were legal orders.
If he’s not able to do that convincingly, the judge must reject the guilty plea and he will face trial on those counts.
He is pleading guilty because he is guilty as charged. Go find some other poor dupe on whom to peddle your silly birther wares.
“Hawaiian officials say they have records proving Obama was born there and is therefore eligible to be president. But so-called birthers challenge that.”
- AP
If this were true, then why would Obama fake an online COLB? Why doesn’t he show the copy he received from the HI DoH?
Miss Tickly has proven the online COLB is a forgery.
Obama’s ineligibility problem can be demonstrated by examing his SSA application for a SSN. From there, you’ll find Obama’s Certificate of Naturalization at the USCIS in Washington, D.C.
Lakin is charged with violating Article 92, which covers 2 different kinds of orders.
Article 92(1) regards general orders and regulations. Lakin’s orders are not general orders, but specific, direct orders to him.
Article 92(2) regards orders that aren’t chargeable under Article 90, 91, or 92(1). If a person can be charged under Article 90, 91, or 92(1) they can’t be charged under 92(2)
Article 90 regards lawful orders from a superior commissioned officer. The orders Lakin is accused of disobeying are direct orders from a Lt Col and 2 Col’s - all superior commissioned officers.
Lakin can be charged under Article 90 so it is not lawful for him to be charged under Article 92(2)
How can he lawfully be charged under Article 92?
He can’t, and that tells you how much the United States military cares about lawfulness. If they treat something is clear-cut as this with such disregard, what makes you think they are treating anything else with earnestness?
Another bit of nonsensical prose. We get rid of Obama through political means, not by convincing some clueless military doctor to commit professional suicide.
The following is the passage from Law of Nations that was used as the definition for a Natural Born Citizen by our Founding Fathers:
“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
Now what part of Vattel’s clear and concise Definition of a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN do Communists, Socialists, Liberals and Democrats not understand?
http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2010/05/aka-obama-ineligible-if-he-was-born-on.html
“How can he lawfully be charged under Article 92?”
__
Well, gee, how come your hero Lakin and his crackerjack lawyer fell for that obvious scam?
Where was BZ when they needed him/her?
He is subject to UCMJ; different set of rules.
.
If this were true, then why would Obama fake an online COLB? Why doesn’t he show the copy he received from the HI DoH?
Miss Tickly has proven the online COLB is a forgery.
Obama’s ineligibility problem can be demonstrated by examing his SSA application for a SSN. From there, you’ll find Obama’s Certificate of Naturalization at the USCIS in Washington, D.C.
“There has also been no investigation in any state or local jurisdiction of Social Security fraud. Both forgery and Social Security fraud are felonies and qualify as high crimes for purposes of impeachment. There have been no criminal investigations. ANY prosecutor in the nation could have investigated these allegations. None have.”
Dereliction of their duties does not exonerate the accused Usurper-In-Chief. It only makes them complicit.
“There has also been no investigation in any state or local jurisdiction of Social Security fraud. Both forgery and Social Security fraud are felonies and qualify as high crimes for purposes of impeachment. There have been no criminal investigations. ANY prosecutor in the nation could have investigated these allegations. None have.”
Dereliction of their duties does not exonerate the accused Usurper-In-Chief. It only makes them complicit.
Someone who pleads guilty cannot thereafter appeal on those grounds. Pleading "guilty" means he is saying he is, in fact and law, guilty.
The background of building Obama's character by communist drug dealer Frank Marshall Davis and Chicago radical Saul Alinsky deserve far more attention than arguing about where he may have been born.
This makes me want to spit on the United States military. I have never been so ashamed of this country at any point in my life. To have to sit down and grovel before Lind, to try to convince her that she’s holding up 3 fingers when he knows she’s holding up 1, is reminiscent of George Orwell’s “1984”.
I can’t stand this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.